https://tonywebster.com/2017/01/minnesota-republicans-profiteering-from-protest/
These are the legislators:
NAACP statement:
// Mod Edit:
To be clear, the governor is a Democrat. This isn't a bill that has a free ride to passing.
Twenty-seven Minnesota legislators—all Republican—have signed on as co-authors to House File 322, a bill that would allow government agencies to file civil lawsuits against individuals to recover costs of police presence and response, along with ”related legal, administrative and court costs," to any person convicted of participating in an unlawful assembly, to any person present at an unlawful assembly, or any person committing public nuisance. (I read the latter two as not requiring a conviction, but the wording is unclear.)
This is troubling. It's worse than criminalizing protest: it's profiteering from protest. It's unnecessary, imprudent, unconstitutional, and racist.
There's no question that protest is a sacred element of American democracy, and there's also no question that sometimes protest leads to public safety hazards. Protest is a First Amendment right; nuance and careful consideration of facts, circumstances, and liberties are required in how law enforcement prepares for, responds to, and protects (yes, that too) our right to protest. But HF 322 eliminates that circumspection, allowing government to use the power of the courts not through established prosecutorial means—where individual and direct culpability are considered—but rather through unbounded civil litigation.
The First Amendment does have boundaries, and some demonstrators choose to overstep them, usually through non-violent acts of civil disobedience. But the law already provides restitution as an available remedy to prosecutors: as part of a sentence, a judge can order ”...payment of compensation to a government entity that incurs loss as a direct result of a crime."
But it gets worse.
HF 322 allows civil litigation for a person's mere presence at an unlawful assembly. If you're a journalist documenting the scene of a notable civil rights protest, you can be sued for money by police. If you don't defend yourself in court, the government will obtain a default judgment against you, and your wages can be garnished, your bank account levied, and your property seized. If you don't get sued right away and later write a story that—for example—irritates the elected sheriff, surprise: you can be sued possibly up to six years after the protest, because HF 322 establishes no separate statute of limitations.
HF 322 is also a risk to Fourth Amendment rights. The bill concludes by saying, ”a civil action may be commenced as is any civil action." And as in the case in most civil actions, the parties to a lawsuit have broad discovery rights. Law enforcement could try to use an HF 322 civil lawsuit to snatch up hard drives and email accounts to find other defendants to sue, or develop ‘intelligence' on protest movements and the people within them.
These are the legislators:
NAACP statement:
Jason Sole, President of the Minneapolis NAACP wrote:
”The burdens of these restrictions would be disproportionately borne by people least able to pay large settlements. HF322 would give police departments a blank check to overreact to public protests. It would also provide an incentive to categorize peaceful demonstrations as ”unlawful assemblies" and to charge as many people and collect as much money as possible. In Minnesota, we don't sue sports fans for extra policing costs associated with events. We don't charge bar patrons an extra fee at closing time for increased police presence. Protecting the right to protest is part of the role of law enforcement, not something for which citizens are expected to pay extra."
// Mod Edit:
To be clear, the governor is a Democrat. This isn't a bill that has a free ride to passing.